<div dir="ltr">hi Bruce, all:<div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 2 October 2015 at 20:43, Bruce Tonkin <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au" target="_blank">Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-AU" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Hello Jordan,<u></u><u></u></span></p><span class="">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> </span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d">>> </span>What advice has Jones Day or ICANN's in house legal team given to the Board - either directly or through management - or directly to management - that has led to erroneous conclusions regarding whether
or not the decisions to exercise powers on the part of a member can be constrained or not?<span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">I will check to see if we have received any legal advice on that topic and share it with the group.
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">I think as Chris noted you can’t actually limit a statutory power, but the idea is to limit what the member does via the member’s own operating procedures.
There is probably still nothing stopping the member though if it actually wanted to use the statutory power. Ie the member has legal standing and can still enforce its statutory powers under California law.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> </span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>This is the heart of the misconception that needs to be cleared up, so thank you for stating it so clearly.</div><div><br></div><div>The decision-making procedures of the single member can very clearly apply such thresholds to certain decisions that would be available to the single member - just like the bylaws do now for some Board decisions.</div><div><br></div><div>The procedures the CMSM uses, if we go down that route. should be in the bylaws.</div><div><br></div><div>And the procedures should only be able to be changed by full consensus of the community - including the Board.</div><div><br></div><div>So nobody is pretending, and nobody should argue, that the CMSM model wouldn't "have" the powers. It's more the case that both of its arms would be tied behind its back and it would be utterly and conclusively unable to exercise some of those powers.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>best</div><div>Jordan</div></div><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</div></div>